4 ms·

This was my first reaction as well, but then I thought about it for a bit, and realised that congress still getting paid is an essential check and balance on ex

by imron 8y ago

This was my first reaction as well, but then I thought about it for a bit, and realised that congress still getting paid is an essential check and balance on executive power. Congressional salaries need to be free of the influence of presidents threatening to shutdown government if their agenda isn't voted on, otherwise the threat of withheld pay could substantially effect how congresspeople vote. That's a bigger problem, even if the optics of congresspeople still getting paid during a shutdown is bad.

mikeash 8y ago
Congress could just pass a law saying the government stays open by default, going back to how things were before a few decades ago, and avoid the whole problem. The executive’s cooperation is not needed here. The president cannot shut down the government. The most he can do is veto a law, and congress can override it.
- imron 8y ago
  > The president cannot shut down the government. And yet for all intents and purposes he has, because he's wielding his veto powers and congress hasn't passed a law to stay open by default. Now imagine the dynamic where congressional salaries were being withheld also, and is it possible that it could influence the votes of ~10 or so senators Trump needs to get wall funding approved? Maybe, maybe not, but it's not a healthy dynamic for the president to be able to exert such direct financial pressure on congresspeople. > Congress could just pass a law saying the government stays open by default You say 'just', but do you really see the current congress passing such a law? I don't think it is just that simple.
  - mikeash 8y ago
    The only thing making any of this difficult is that Congress doesn’t want to do it. If they wanted to find the government, it would be funded. If they wanted to have the government stay open by default, it would be done. It’s not that simple, but only because a substantial part of Congress doesn’t want to do this. I don’t think this financial pressure would change anything. But it would be trivial to avoid if they wanted to.

by imron 8y ago

mikeash 8y ago

Congress could just pass a law saying the government stays open by default, going back to how things were before a few decades ago, and avoid the whole problem. The executive’s cooperation is not needed here. The president cannot shut down the government. The most he can do is veto a law, and congress can override it.

imron 8y ago
> The president cannot shut down the government. And yet for all intents and purposes he has, because he's wielding his veto powers and congress hasn't passed a law to stay open by default. Now imagine the dynamic where congressional salaries were being withheld also, and is it possible that it could influence the votes of ~10 or so senators Trump needs to get wall funding approved? Maybe, maybe not, but it's not a healthy dynamic for the president to be able to exert such direct financial pressure on congresspeople. > Congress could just pass a law saying the government stays open by default You say 'just', but do you really see the current congress passing such a law? I don't think it is just that simple.
- mikeash 8y ago
  The only thing making any of this difficult is that Congress doesn’t want to do it. If they wanted to find the government, it would be funded. If they wanted to have the government stay open by default, it would be done. It’s not that simple, but only because a substantial part of Congress doesn’t want to do this. I don’t think this financial pressure would change anything. But it would be trivial to avoid if they wanted to.